# Tag Info

0

This is an interesting question. Basically it's very similar like any meteorite collision. The gas planet makes here no other difference, but that there will be no crater. Assuming a Jupiter-like planet and an Earth-like planet (Except, say... half the mass of Jupiter), what would happen when the two collide? For clarification: What would the actual ...

1

No the time taken does not depend of the velocity attained by the first ball(if they are ideally rigid) it rather depends on the elasticity or rigidity of the balls. So for ideally rigid bodies, the time taken to transfer approaches 0. Nothing would happen with an increase in distance between the two balls. See: Is the reaction force for a stone hitting a ...

1

Rotate the digram so the line connecting the circles is horizontal at the moment that they touch - since you know dx and dy, you just take the arc tangent. Now you move the frame of reference so the point where the two balls meet is stationary. The actual speed of the center of mass is just the vector mean of the velocities of the two balls (if they have ...

1

So I came up with a graphical solution to this kind of problem. It might help you understand the process of collisions, without giving you a direct answer. Consider an Cartesian coordinate system xy for measuring momentum. Draw the initial momentum vectors $\vec{A} = m_A \vec{v}_A$ and $\vec{B} = m_B \vec{v}_B$. Draw a circle with the two vectors as ...

1

Kinetics: In physics and engineering, kinetics is a term for the branch of classical mechanics that is concerned with the relationship between the motion of bodies and its causes, namely forces and torques. Kinematics: Kinematics is the branch of classical mechanics which describes the motion of points, bodies (objects), and systems of bodies ...

0

It is a hypothetical condition as inertial will never let this condition happen. For the sake of argument I am using impulse. faster you stop an object more will be the force. Example using gloves to stop a fast ball in sports. $$F_{impact}*t=mv-mu$$ $$F_{impact}=\frac{mv-mu}{t}$$ $$F_{impact}=\lim_{t \to 0}\frac{mv-mu}{t}$$ According the equation the force ...

3

I am only going to leave a brief answer, seeing that the comments are very accurate. The paradox can simply be resolved by considering the elastic nature of all the objects. How so ever instantaneous might the $dt$ or the time of collision seem to the human eye, actually it occurs over a small duration, based on the elasticity of both the objects involved in ...

0

Buoyancy is based on the principle that water pressure increases with depth. If something is submerged, the pressure acting upwards on it will be slightly larger than that acting down on it. If this imbalance is larger than the acceleration of gravity the object floats. Buoyancy is also proportional to the volume of the object but acceleration is related to ...

-1

No, for the buoyancy force also act for the balloon that calmly float, or to push you up when you swim under the sea level. Buoyancy is a volumetric floating effect, it does not relate to surface or dynamics.

1

The formula that WhatRoughBeast uses is not correct. It should be $$KE = \left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{1-\left(\frac{v}{c}\right)^2}} - 1\right) mc^2 = \left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{1-0.22^2}} - 1\right) (22,000)(3\cdot10^8)^2 = 5\cdot10^{19} J$$ Your calculation wasn't far off since relativistic effects aren't very large at 22% of the speed of light, so $KE = ... 1 You've underestimated the effect, although your math is correct as far as it goes. At 22% of c, relativistic effects do rear their ugly heads, and the proper equation is $$KE = \frac{\frac{mv^2}{2}}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}} = 7.6\times10^{19}\text{ J}$$ Divide by$63\times10^{12}$and the ratio is 1,200,000 (1.2 million). And yes, this is an unreasonably ... 0 You should not worry about the force exerted during the collision, because it depends on how stiff the object and the surface are, and because it does not affect the outcome. Remember$F=ma$? OK, you know the mass$m$, so what you are asking is what is the acceleration$a$. So what is acceleration? It is the change in velocity$\delta v$divided by the time ... 0 The equation you gave is just the final speed after a collision. To assume the surface does not move is to say that its initial speed is zero, and its mass very large. If it were not, after the collision it would move (like a car would start moving if hit by another one moving). The equation assumes both objects are free to move after the collision. It also ... 0 shockwave speed: just a remark that the speed involved in collision already gives you the order of magnitude: for Europe size (~ 3.000 km ) / 10 km/s = 300 s = 5 mn. now for the effect of the collision, since energy is proportional to the mass and to the square of the collision speed, it is very different depending of the collider caracteristics (M + v). ... 1 For the first three cases involving the car one can think of the collisions in the frame of reference where the motorcycle is at rest. The car approaches the motorcycle at a speed of 110 miles per hour in the first case, 50 miles per hour in the second case, and 60 miles per hour in the third. Comparing the three cases is a little easier now. The force ... 1 There are different forms of energy. Energy can be converted from one form to another but cannot be destroyed. In this case the kinetic energy of the hammer is driving the nail into the wood which is breaking the molecular bonds in the wood fiber. The energy is converted to heat energy as a result of the breaking of the bonds and the friction of the nail in ... 0 The ball only feels an impulse along the normal direction and not the tangential direction. Hence there is only a change in momentum in the normal direction and not the tangential. It is probably worth noting that although the overall momentum is conserved when a ball strikes a very large wall the momentum of the ball does change (and so will that of the ... 0 After reading your comments/answers, I've come to realize that my line of reasoning was wrong because I wasn't fully thinking in terms of spacetime. I think the following thought experiment answers my original question. Imagine we have three massive objects: the Earth and two apples. Now, assume that apple A and apple B are initially held (by an external ... 0 I don't think "at rest" is a meaningful concept in general relativity. Everything constantly travels along geodesic paths. If you choose one frame as your "rest frame" other frames will appear accelerated, but that is an artifact of our Euclidean understanding of curved spacetime. The impact of two objects traveling on geodesics is as easily explained as the ... 0 In an elastic collision, kinetic energy is conserved. That is, for a system of$N$particles, $$\sum_{j=1}^N\frac{1}{2}m_jv_{i_j}^2=\sum_{j=1}^N\frac{1}{2}m_jv_{o_j}^2$$ where$v_i$denotes initial velocity and$v_o\$ denotes final velocity. This is incredibly useful when it comes to calculating the final velocities of the objects. In the case of an object ...

2

Background There is a good reference1 on the physics of sound/shock waves in solids (look at Chapter XI). I found the following (on page 688) very interesting and relevant to your question: In a solid or liquid, a shock wave with a strength of even a hundred thousand atmospheres is regarded as weak. Such a wave differs little from an acoustic wave: it ...

0

The explosive material being tested is typically in a rod or puck shape whose radius is considerably smaller than the impactor and anvil. The impact generates a shock wave through the material sample. Since I am using an Eulerian code to simulate this, I need to know the pressure of the resulting shock wave in the material. Is there a way to ...

Top 50 recent answers are included